I would let Schilling walk into the Hall today, hell, I'd build him his own wing, if he'd just promise to disappear completely from the spotlight. Never having to hear or see him again would be well worth having him in the Hall.

Art Vandelay wrote:I would let Schilling walk into the Hall today, hell, I'd build him his own wing, if he'd just promise to disappear completely from the spotlight. Never having to hear or see him again would be well worth having him in the Hall.

You ask the impossible. I would be shocked if Schilling didn't enter politics or get a T.V./radio job somewhere.

Art Vandelay wrote:I would let Schilling walk into the Hall today, hell, I'd build him his own wing, if he'd just promise to disappear completely from the spotlight. Never having to hear or see him again would be well worth having him in the Hall.

QFT!

"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." ~George Carlin

Well take in to consideration, that after Randy Johnson we may never see a another 300 win pitcher for long time, pitchers just don't go deep enough often to get wins and plus they are baby'd like crazy... so any of the current crop of super stars hall eligible.

Padres Fan wrote:Well take in to consideration, that after Randy Johnson we may never see a another 300 win pitcher for long time, pitchers just don't go deep enough often to get wins and plus they are baby'd like crazy... so any of the current crop of super stars hall eligible.

So lower the standard just because the game has changed? That makes a lot of sense.

"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." ~George Carlin

No I am saying Schilling is agreat player, so was Smoltz, Johan Santana, possibly Jake Peavy and CC will be too, but none will ever get to 300 wins, unless CC has years like last year for the next 8-10 years which is highly unlikely, Yankees spent too much to let him pitch complete games all the time and pitch on 3-4 days rest

Padres Fan wrote:Well take in to consideration, that after Randy Johnson we may never see a another 300 win pitcher for long time, pitchers just don't go deep enough often to get wins and plus they are baby'd like crazy... so any of the current crop of super stars hall eligible.

I'm not real big on wins being a major factor, but... If you are taking that into consideration, then you have to consider that Glavine, Maddux, Clemens, and (soon) RJ all made it to 300 pitching under the same generational mindset as Schilling. Kenny Rodgers spent the first 4 seasons of his career as a RP and has more wins than Schilling as does David Wells and Jamie Moyer.I have no doubt at some point people will look at 250 Win pitchers under the same light as past pitchers who won 300. But when there are several active players who reached the 300 win mark its hard for me to start lowering the bar already.

Yoda wrote:So what? You are arguing about 21.1 IP. Besides, he could be perfect for 21.1 IP with 60 Ks but if his team doesn't score any runs then would he have a ring?

Look at the flip side for a second. Had he blown up in those starts, would that make him a bad pitcher and undeserving of getting in the Hall?

I'm not pretending it didn't happen. It's just a weak ass argument for a player. He was lucky to been part of a winning team.

BronXBombers51 wrote:Agreed. The fact that he has three rings is largely luck-based. It doesn't say anything about his personal skill level or what he personally accomplished in his career. And generally four seasons are not good enough to make the HOF.

The marginal value of a great player, is higher on a good team. That is a pretty basic part of sports economics. For instance in 2001, Schilling was worth about 7 wins more than a replacement player, and the D-Backs won the division by 2 games. Those seven wins meant a lot more to his team than they did to say the Pirates who still wouldn't have won 70 games with Schilling. Say the Pirates traded Todd Ritchie to the D-Backs for Schilling, Todd Ritchie's 2 wins above replacement player are not enough to help the Diamondbacks win anything, while With Curt Schilling the Pirates still struggle to win 65 games. Say somehow the D-Backs still make it to the World Series with Todd Ritchie pitching, do they win it? probably not. That is postseason dominance matters in the equation. Curt Schilling got to the postseason because he had good teammates. His team world series titles because they had Curt Schilling.

As to your point, BB: yes anyone can get hot for a few weeks in October, Curt Schilling has been dominant nearly every time he pitches in the post season. He has a 2.23 era in 133.1 ip. It is not like he was just great once or twice, he has a consistent track record of helping very good teams win rings.

"I do not think baseball of today is any better than it was 30 years ago... I still think Radbourne is the greatest of the pitchers." John Sullivan 1914-Old athletes never change.

It matters to people who value intangibles, clutch hits and the # of rings in order to evaluate a player. Doesn't mean those things should matter at all.

thedude wrote:Curt Schilling got to the postseason because he had good teammates. His team world series titles because they had Curt Schilling.

Yes it was a team effort and thank you for pointing that out. Schilling didn't score any runs for his team the last time I checked. Whether Schilling was good or bad, he is probably still a HOFer in my view (as much as I hate him). What he did in the playoffs doesn't make him a better pitcher. He just happened to be at the right place at the right time.

"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." ~George Carlin